3 min video 'disproving' evolution

25 posts / 0 new
Last post
Lmale's picture
3 min video 'disproving' evolution

Have any of you seen the video posted by the facebook society jeasus christ is king?
Hes says he can disprove evolution in a 3 min video.
First off hes so arrogant he thinks he can do what hundreds if not thousands of the smartest theists and scientists have faild to do in 155years.
Second the very first point he makes is so utterly moronic i couldnt force myself to watch the rest. He states that evolution cannot be observed therefore is not a science!!!!
Wtf have we been doing for all that time oh yes i know weve been observing the world and seeing evolutionary changes.
Its easiest to see in shortest lived species but even in humans weve seen evolutionary changes in 155years.
The average heights been going up as women are being attracted more to tall men thanks to hollywood and models. Part is diet ofcourse but not enough to exclude evolution of the species.
I know this and im just a lay person with a bad memory that prevents me learning much anymore.
The videos been reposted by theists so often ive seen it in my news feed many times in a short length of time.
I dont know which is worse this rednecks arrogant stupidity or the gullibility of the theists reposting because the believe its fact.

Subscription Note: 

Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.

Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.

firebolt's picture
I can't find it! Do you have

I can't find it! Do you have a link for us? I really want to see it and have a good laugh! :)

Lmale's picture
I can do one better go to

I can do one better go to utube search the amazing atheist. This gus dissects the morons videos hes done 2 (tho ive heard of a third where the moron said hes fearing for his life now hes told the truth) so the amazing atheist did 2 rebuttals funniest shit ive seen in months.

Steve's picture
Steve's picture
^^^^^^^^^^^ It's the bottom

^^^^^^^^^^^ It's the bottom link (I thought I could embed a YT vid in here)

Gordan Šojat's picture
Belive in evolution....read

Belive in evolution....read Forbidden Archeology and Human devolution by Dr. Michael A. Cremo...

Lmale's picture
Evolution isnt a belief its a

Evolution isnt a belief its a scientific theory. As such its backed by mountains of evidence. Unless contrary evidence is produced evolution has gained the right to be called a fact.

Lmale's picture
A law describes a theory.

A law describes a theory. Theory can never become a law EVER. Please visit notatheory.com

ChildofGod's picture
a scientific law cannot be

a scientific law cannot be changed and a theory can become a law thats why it is called a THEORY and once it is a law it is a law. or so Atheists believe. They also believe that matter cannot be created or destroyed but it can and God can do all of that if He pleases to do so.

Nyarlathotep's picture
"a scientific law cannot be

"a scientific law cannot be changed"
SCIENCE FAIL, they can and have been changed.

"They also believe that matter cannot be created or destroyed"
SCIENCE FAIL, not only can matter be created and destroyed, this is done regularly. In fact when you go get the medical procedure called a PET scan, that is part of the process. Another example is the particle accelerators you hear about in the news. You know how they discover those particles? They don't just set up detectors to find them, they create huge amounts of matter inside the detector and hope they accidentally make the particle they are looking for (and hope the detector registers it).

Jeff Vella Leone's picture
"matter cannot be created or

"matter cannot be created or destroyed" IN A CONTAINED SPACE. is the law.

"SCIENCE FAIL, not only can matter be created and destroyed, this is done regularly."
This is wrong though, up until now we have seen no destruction of matter but transformation from one form to an other.
Since matter is energy and energy in the vacuum is infinite.

"particle accelerators" "they create huge amounts of matter inside the detector and hope they accidentally make the particle they are looking for"
No the Hadron Collider accelerates atoms and then collides them, it does not create matter from 'nothing', since we haven't even experienced nothing' yet.
"Its synchrotron is designed to collide two opposing particle beams of either protons at up to 4 teraelectronvolts (4 TeV or 0.64 microjoules), or lead nuclei at an energy of 574 TeV (92.0 µJ) per nucleus (2.76 TeV per nucleon),[4][5] with energies to be roughly doubled to around 7 TeV (14 TeV collision energy) —more than seven times any predecessor collider—by around 2015."

Nyarlathotep's picture
In physics when we remove a

In physics when we remove a particle, we say it was destroyed or annihilated. When we add a particle we say it was created. I think we are just having a language problem. It seems your saying it isn't created, its a conversion (which it is). We use creation and annihilation operators to describe the process.

I don't like quote wars, but I understand, you don't know me from Adam, so I will participate:
"The principle of matter conservation may be considered as an approximate physical law that is true only in the classical sense, without consideration of special relativity and quantum mechanics. It is approximately true except in certain high energy applications."

Jeff Vella Leone's picture
The context of the current

The context of the current argument was that matter is created or destroyed.

It simply does not. It is clear that matt, was meaning destroyed and created literally.

What ever interpretation to the language you have, you used the wrong ones in that situation.

Matter= energy

Energy cannot be created or destroyed. in closed systems, is an other law.

"In physics when we remove a particle, we say it was destroyed or annihilated."
what we say is not the law, it is just a matter of speaking between 'us', we do not know if it was destroyed or not,
We say it appears and disappears at quantum level when we are discussing matter.

Nyarlathotep's picture
"Matter= energy"

"Matter= energy"
That actually isn't correct. on dimensional ground alone.

Jeff Vella Leone's picture
matter is made up of

matter is made up of different combination of energy that appears and disappears, like protons and electrons.
At the quantum level, it is all about different fluctuations of energy.

find me a single paper which supports the idea that matter is not made up of energy.

Jeff Vella Leone's picture
Last 10 min shows you how

Last 10 min shows you how energy is released from the division or separation of a combination of protons and neutrons:

But it keeps going down, here is a basic explanation how molecules are formed:

Check the double split experiment that suggest that we create matter, thus it suggests that energy and different combination of energy is being shaped in a way from the vacuum energy which is infinite.
This is show when we see quarks appear and disappear out of existence.

Thus indicating that the infinite energy in the vacuum is somewhat responsible for creating matter that we see.

We are still dwelling on this issue, but the fact that matter comes from quarks is not debatable.
The the fact that quarks spend half their time in the vacuum indicates that maybe we are dealing with a property of energy which is not well understood that we call matter.

Nyarlathotep's picture
You can take an electron and

You can take an electron and a positron, they will annihilate themselves and it will leave only 2 photons. So we start with matter, but end without matter. Clearly matter has been destroyed. Matter is not conserved, since the amount of matter a closed system can change with time. Energy however; is conserved because the amount of energy a closed system has is constant and is not a function of time.

A good analogy would be a machine that makes change for people. You tell the machine what kind of money you want out (say dollar bills) then put money into the machine and it converts it for you. So say you put 100 pennies into the machine and it spits out a dollar bill. The amount of money in the machine (when no one is using it) is constant, yet the amount of pennies in the machine is not. In our machine pennies are not conserved but money is. While you can construct dollars from pennies, you would never say pennies = dollars because that is clearly wrong.

firebolt's picture
Thank you for the links!

Thank you for the links! Amazing stuff and it is really interesting to listen to his point of view. We are very like minded.

SammyShazaam's picture
It's really frustrating how

It's really frustrating how people try to treat science like a religion... it's not. Evolution is a theory. And, we're cool with that.

Jeff Vella Leone's picture
yea very frustrating, though

yea very frustrating, though what is frustrating even more is how Darwinists and most uninformed people treat evolution, human evolution, and human origins as the same thing.
Where they are 3 different things.

Evolution is a proven tested and confirmed fact.
Human evolution is a proven tested and confirmed fact.
Human origins is a well debatable thing, nowhere close to be even considered a theory, there are several hypothesis though on the matter.

Lmale's picture
Yes abiogenesis is the

Yes abiogenesis is the attempted study of the origin of life humans have now made synthetic evolvable xna from inorganic molecules see my science is awesome topic.

ChildofGod's picture
i dont treat science as a

i dont treat science as a religion... and with evolution being a "theory" its not, we are how we were born to be, some of uf lack the knowledge of where we came from so they say that evolution is the reason but i beg to differ. honestly i dont see how atheists can say science explains everything because all i see that it has done is explain nothing.

Lmale's picture
Not to creationists. It

Not to creationists. It really annoys me theres a mountain of evidence for evolution its a scientific theory so it had to go through a rigorous process including independent peer review. Weve seen it happening!!! Theists have spent 155yrs trying to disprove it and failed miserably. And we are reverse engineering dinosaurs from chickens using only atavisms.
They still refuse to accept it yet accept creationism based on a book with no evidence in support of the book let alone to support their hypothesis. Its still just a hypothesis yet a christian school that also has non christian students is teaching creationism. And we caught creationists faking the peer review by setting up a christian science journal staffed by yep you guessed it christians. And then they have the cheek to say the whole peer review process is dishonest.

ImFree's picture
That video is hilarious.

That video is hilarious.

Zaphod's picture
That video: Yikes! It would

That video: Yikes! It would take to much to try and get that guy to see outside his paradigm.

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.